ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2026
Outcomes among patients bridged to heart transplant with microaxial flow versus durable left ventricular assist device support.
Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Paying the toll: Transfusion and outcomes of patients bridged with mechanical circulatory support to heart transplantation.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Surgically Managed Deep Sternal Wound Infection After Heart Transplantation.Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate characteristics and outcomes of patients bridged to orthotopic heart transplantation with microaxial left ventricular assist device (ma-LVAD) versus durable LVAD (d-LVAD).
methodsThis was a single-center retrospective cohort study in which characteristics outcomes of patients undergoing orthotopic heart transplantation between May 2019 and May 2024 who were bridged with ma-LVAD versus d-LVAD, were compared.
resultsOver the study period, the percentage of patients bridged with ma-LVAD increased from 0% to 20%. Patients bridged with d-LVAD were more likely to have history of hypertension (80% vs 65%; P = .03), a higher body mass index (32.53 vs 28.15; P < .0001), and anti-human leukocyte antigens antibodies (54% vs 36%; P = .02) before transplant, otherwise groups were similar in their baseline characteristics. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no difference in survival between these 2 bridging strategies. However, postoperative blood product use (3 vs 0 units; P < .0001), moderate or severe primary graft dysfunction (27% vs 14%; P = .04), and delayed sternal closure (45% vs 9%; P < .0001) were all higher among those bridged with d-LVAD versus ma-LVAD. Rejection on the first postoperative biopsy was reported in a 60% in the d-LVAD group versus 33% in the ma-LVAD group (P = .0006). Postoperative intensive care unit (7 vs 6 days; P = .03) and overall postoperative length of stay (17 vs 12 days; P = .002) were greater in patients bridged with d-LVAD versus ma-LVAD, respectively.
conclusionsThe use of ma-LVAD compared with d-LVAD as a bridging strategy was not associated with differences in survival. However, bridging with ma-LVAD compared with d-LVAD was associated with lower morbidity after orthotopic heart transplantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.